inward facing bench seats do not require seat belts to be tested for MOT purpose, only front facing or rear facing seats require seat belts to be fitted and tested. I have attended many RTA's involving L/Rovers back in the seventies - yes there where casualties but no fatalities in any of them (military and civilian)
thats what i thought too but also that the number of seats is taken into account when insuring. If you have a 7 seater but take 2 out when it goes in for mot then it will be classed as a 5 seater as the other 2 are not there for testing or at least that is what i was always told.
when i took my bike for a test i had removed the pillion pegs and had a removeable seat cowl but was told unless i took it in with pegs attached and seat cover off they would test it as a single seater and carrying pillions would be illegal and insurance voided in the event of an accident.
as far as dogs are concerned im not sure, i always took mine in the boot and nothing was ever said about it.
livers
Well-Known Member
I think this has been asked before but the department for transport FAQ page Q13 should put anyones mind at rest how the law stands
Think! | Children: Child car seats
Think! | Children: Child car seats
As far as the original question goes, the closest I can find is this:
from another forum.... FightBack Forums > Fixed Penalty Given - Offence Code 950
Unfortunately I can't find the regulation online. So I'll have to trust the above is a definite quote from it. The details would need to be tested/interpreted in a court of law (can't find a precedent, too many search results to trawl through!) As far as a definition of what is/isn't a seat, I think the courts would need to be satisfied its either a seat fitted as original equipment in a similar car, eg if you transferred LR station wagon seats into your van/pick up; or if not, then an equivalent or greater safety than offered by a standard seat, eg a properly constructed seat from a material durable in an accident scenario (so, wood would probably be deemed unsafe - splinters, unable to take equivalent loads in a crash than a metal framed, etc); and it would need to be mounted securely; and seat belts fitted if required. The seat belt regs are complicated but there's a handy guideline for what's required and tested at MoT - plenty of MoT manuals online to browse through the details, the best one I've found is the official one which is
MOT Documentation Contents Page
Hope it helps.
from another forum.... FightBack Forums > Fixed Penalty Given - Offence Code 950
Unfortunately I can't find the regulation online. So I'll have to trust the above is a definite quote from it. The details would need to be tested/interpreted in a court of law (can't find a precedent, too many search results to trawl through!) As far as a definition of what is/isn't a seat, I think the courts would need to be satisfied its either a seat fitted as original equipment in a similar car, eg if you transferred LR station wagon seats into your van/pick up; or if not, then an equivalent or greater safety than offered by a standard seat, eg a properly constructed seat from a material durable in an accident scenario (so, wood would probably be deemed unsafe - splinters, unable to take equivalent loads in a crash than a metal framed, etc); and it would need to be mounted securely; and seat belts fitted if required. The seat belt regs are complicated but there's a handy guideline for what's required and tested at MoT - plenty of MoT manuals online to browse through the details, the best one I've found is the official one which is
MOT Documentation Contents Page
Hope it helps.
To question further then, what are the rules? does anyone know?
I have a series 3 1973 with a cushioned panel over the off side rear wheel arch, not proper bench seat, is it legal for my 10 year old to sit on this with no belt? my 3yr old will be well tethered in the front in his seat!
Cheers
Nick
I have a series 3 1973 with a cushioned panel over the off side rear wheel arch, not proper bench seat, is it legal for my 10 year old to sit on this with no belt? my 3yr old will be well tethered in the front in his seat!
Cheers
Nick
Can't say for sure, but I doubt it.
To be considered a seat, it would need to meet/exceed the requirements as set out in the type approval in existance at the time. Obviously, with the LR station wagon having met this regulation, approval, then manufactured and sold, then the seats from a station wagen if transferred into a van would be okay, but I don't think they used simple cushioned boxes at the sides, they used a metal framed seat secured at specific points, with a fixed custioned base attached, and a backrest??? If you can cite another vehicle of the era which has a similar seat as yours and met requirements (ie it was a car, not a van) then that could be part of the defence.
Of course, all the above would be interpreted in court by a judge etc.....
on my profile
Land Rover Zone - impstar's Album: Vehicle
Land Rover Zone - impstar's Album: Vehicle
Badger
Well-Known Member
Some interesting links and information, but i'm still not 100% on how the law stands with regards to passengers in the rear.
From what i can gather
I'll go with point number 3 as the way in which it applies to my Landy, although i have windows in the rear, it is still classed as a ' van ' so to speak and if i have an accident, then the rear passengers, and myself possibly, won't be insured at the time of an accident.
Next stage is to look at fitting some proper seats to carry passengers in the rear.
From what i can gather
- If seats belts are fitted, then they must be worn
- If the passenger is over the age of 14 then it's their responsibility to wear one
- If your vehicle is registered as a 3 seater ( in the front ) then the rear of the vehicle is classed along the same lines as a van and thus it's illegal to carry passengers in the rear unless seated in a proper regulated seat with belts ( lap belt at least )
- Dogs, nothing found so far
I'll go with point number 3 as the way in which it applies to my Landy, although i have windows in the rear, it is still classed as a ' van ' so to speak and if i have an accident, then the rear passengers, and myself possibly, won't be insured at the time of an accident.
Next stage is to look at fitting some proper seats to carry passengers in the rear.
Cheers Paul
Can you help with this also?
If i were to remove all the roof and have it totally open, can it be driven on the road legally and what would it be called as not pickup?
Only I need to garage asap for insurance etc but door to garage too bloody low to get it in with the roof on!
New doors when money allows
Sorry so many question but new to all this and this forum has be excellent
Nick
Can you help with this also?
If i were to remove all the roof and have it totally open, can it be driven on the road legally and what would it be called as not pickup?
Only I need to garage asap for insurance etc but door to garage too bloody low to get it in with the roof on!
New doors when money allows
Sorry so many question but new to all this and this forum has be excellent
Nick
Last edited:
martin1512
Well-Known Member
I have a 109 hard top that I have removed the roof from. I carry my 7 and 9 year old kids in the back and my 3 yearold in the front. I have fitted station wagon bench seats and seat belts. The vehicle is now insured as a 7 seat vehicle. The vehicle is perfectly legal to drive on the the road in this configuration, just as a soft top would be.
TBH you're better off starting another thread with that kind of question. AFAIK insurance companies don't ask for body type, or don't have to classify into rigid groups, for modifications. DVLA probably do though - and you'd need to change the details on your V5. What to - unsure...???
